On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 00:32 -0400, Warren Togami wrote: > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > Possibly, because RH once again seems to have failed to communicate what > > THEIR plan is and seems to be pressing something which doesn't seem to > > be clear to themselves onto the community. > > > > At the moment I am primarily referring to this nonsensical regressions > > this new release flow and koji impose on my packages. I see regressions > > all over the place: What once was simple, now requires additional effort > > and wastes my time. > > > > Ralf > > Ralf, > > You are going way overboard in escalating what is entirely a non-issue. What you consider "non-issue", I consider a fundamental flaw in work-flow causing harm to community's involvment into Fedora. That's why I am making a fuzz about it. > All package updates going out after F7 release will need to go through > the update system. Pushing packages in this way is NOT a horrible > burden that you make it out to be. Update 40 packages at once and you'll probably notice why I consider this to be a crack ridden work-flow. 2 steps more per package and one form per package demonstrates the flaws of this workflow. > This is only formalizing a process > that was very uncontrolled in the past only because we didn't have time > to write anything like this. I don't see any thing uncontrolled. To the contrary, I perceive your new work-flow to suffer from "Prussian State Officer" (Germ. proverb. "Preussische Beamtenmentalität") mentality. > Fact of the matter is, we were doing poorly in Fedora in the past > without package update announcements for Extras. Sure, this was > harmless in most cases, but in the case of security this was quite > possibly dangerous and not in the interest of spreading necessary > awareness to our community. > > Today Core updates happen using this update system. It is a smooth and > formal process. This might be your vision - It definitely is not mine. 0) maintainer tests package's functionality. > 1) Maintainer checks changes into CVS branch. > 2) Maintainer builds. > 3) Maintainer tests that build. > 4) Maintainer fills out the form with the N-V-R, optional security > (yes/no), optional Bug numbers fixed, and some fills in some details of > what the update is about, then chooses updates or updates-testing. > 5) Submit, where security and/or rel-eng team pushes it through. Now where in this scheme is Will Woods? I don't see him testing anything. All I see is more bureaucracy and more manual steps than before. > This is necessary and we are going to do it. Yes, you think it's necessary and you apparently don't give a damn about other people's opinion - poor. > I believe after working > out some initial kinks, participants will realize how much it really > doesn't suck. ... if you think so, I could not disagree more. > However, if you don't wish to participate then you are free to leave. I did not expect any different answer from a person who could not refrain from attacking and offending me in rude language, before. You will have to understand that the bridges between you and me are burnt. Ralf -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
